Yes. You need a well functioning product or service, but you also need a well functioning idea with a language that functionally communicates it if you want to have a successful business product.

Note: I would argue that every good product has a special idea that exists within it and if you don’t articulate it well you simply have a commodity and will careen around your category in a bumper car race of similarity (albeit with different colors).

That said. Conceptually, I want to sell an idea so people buy a product (not sell a product so they buy into some idea of what it offers). To me, within that twist of words, and wording, resides success.

Let me share thoughts on each aspect.

Ideas.

Nassim Taleb suggested “loyalty to an idea is not a good thing for anyone.”I disagree. In fact, I would argue discerning what idea to be loyal to versus which ideas should be ‘loosely held’ may be one of the most important aspects of success.

** note: this may be what Taleb meant but it’s fun to disagree with him.

Ideas don’t need to be uncovered. Most are simply submerged or buried under bias, discomfort, political correctness and general societal bullshit.

Once they arise from all that muck some really important conversations can happen where people realize that people are people and ideas can connect them.

We can accept that there is more in common then different between people so an idea, well articulated, can gather people.

We can accept that hopes and dreams are fairly equal even among what seems like in unequal dispersion of their hopes & dreams.

If you accept this, even embrace this, you stop restricting possibilities and stop viewing conversations around ideas in a restrictive way, but rather the fact a belief an idea offers a center on which other ideas can collect around. This is an important thought because if you viewed this same concept through the lens of ‘I sell products, not ideas’ you would actually have to be in the product line extension/innovation business because that’s what collects around a product-centric view. Products have value, but ideas with products attached is multiplicative value.

Now. I will unequivocally state that ideas are a dime a dozen (albeit not all are created equal) and multiple products can actually serve the same idea, therefore, how you articulate the idea, and what language gets ‘coded’ to that idea/product combination matters – a lot.

Language.

Language, or words, are the oxygen (or carbon monoxide) to ideas. Languages and words tap into the attitudes, influences behavior and shapes culture. The right word, or combination of words, shapes what we pay attention to as well as HOW we pay attention to what is being said and who is saying it.

** two better books discussing words, diametrically opposed in terms of style and how things are discussed, are How to Speak Human/Jackson & Jackson & The Symbolic Species/Terrence Deacon.

Words then establish some expectations, or cultural ‘permissions’, tapping into biases and experiences (either locking them or unlocking them). And, ultimately, words shape culture. While they certainly can amplify differences, they can also foster a shared sense of identity – at best bridging perceived differences and establishing commonalities (unearthing what has been unseen or ignored). I will say that the most effective words are words typically derived from established stories or narratives.

“The story you attach to something is just as important to creating the value as the product itself.”

Rory Sutherland

Therefore, for a product to be grounded in an idea that idea needs words, language and stories to craft its place in culture. This is often called “linguistics influence” (language plays a role in guiding thoughts, attitudes and perceptions).

**note: people should not confuse this with ‘perception is reality.’ Perceptions shape the value of reality. That distinction is important because the moment there is misalignment between perceptions and reality (the product or experience) then there is dissonance in the mental structure which makes it unavailable to distinction.

Words influence how we think about things conceptually. That means if we can articulate an idea in the right way, the words (embodying an idea) can frame, or reframe, the entire conversation. It is here we should think of words, and conversations, as an expansive tool not a restrictive tool. This is important because words influence focus (which is tied to attention) highlighting some information, yet, opens us up to additional information. All this to say for an idea to not only exist, but prosper, it must have a language and words.

Products.

Truly meaningful differentiated products are anomaly – they are in fact like unicorns (okay, how about like protected species). That doesn’t mean we don’t bend ourselves into pretzels trying to convince ourselves we have differentiated our product in some meaningful way. I often call this the ‘differentiation rabbit hole.’ I would argue, and have, make your product functionally great against a specific need (or want) and then articulate your idea in a distinct way and you will not only sell a viable product, but create a value proposition so it can be healthy in the marketplace.

Let me be clear. If you do not have a functional, preferably functionally good, offering, no matter what language you use, no matter what story you create, you will fail. It may not be today, or even tomorrow, but inevitably your business will crumble under the weight of failed expectations.

Let me be clear. If you do not understand the difference between need and want, you have a 50/50 chance your idea will crumble under the weight of your wrong choice of what it is you offer.

Lastly.

A quick thought on the relationship between people and ideas.

People.

The universe can be confusing in that we can see distribution connections (the internet, globalized shipping, technology, mail, etc) as the creator of what is successful and what is not. The truth is that it is humans who disseminate and distribute ideas. This is important because this eliminates biological spread as a way of growth or death. Instead we should be viewing the relationship in a mental way. There are too many studies to source that have dealt with the question of what causes a particular idea to engage and spread. It is difficult to characterize which ideas gain success, and which don’t, because, well, ideas are used by humans to spread & be distributed. The idea has no control of its own survival. Its survival resides in the imperfections of humans. Maybe said another way – it is important to understand despite our illusion humans are in control of the development and implementation of ideas; they don’t work for us, we work for them – we serve as machines or distribution widgets/system for spreading ideas.

Which leads me to amplification (or speed) and ideas. We far too often speak of engagement as the key to ideas when we should actually be assessing the interaction of humans and ideas with velocity in mind. If humans control ideas then they also have the opportunity to not only dictate their survival but also an ideas ability to thrive – an idea can survive in a small corner of the world or dominate the world (not all survival is created equal).

All that said.

Ideas are dependent upon people. In other words, if no human cares about your idea, it does not exist.

Ok. Let me share an example of a neat little startup I have had the privilege of assisting. It’s a company called Dope Coffee. Yes. It’s a coffee business and brand, but its actually an idea for which the coffee products are simply a means to sharing the idea. the brand idea has principled aspects all of which insure a cohesive in messaging and a coherence in ideas it collects, strategies it pursues and tactics it implements.

A company of creatives who use coffee as a medium to tell black culture’s story one cup of coffee at a time.

Sometimes a product is a means to an end. Sometimes a product is created not to solve a problem, but rather to not fail the moment & the idea. In fact. Sometimes a product is created to insure it is crafted to INSURE the moment happens. That is Dope Coffee. As a product the coffee has been crafted to linger on the taste buds so the drinker wants to linger in the moment and linger on the conversations that occur over a cup of coffee. And within the moment, and moments, resides the Dope Coffee idea.

Dope Coffee is an idea captured in products people can use.

The idea.

Society according to Dope.

Exclusion is easy. It’s easy because society thrives on binaries. It’s us versus them, black versus white, good versus bad. Its also wrong. The strength of society resides in inclusion not “versus.” The strength of society is a better world in which we all get to maintain our individuality without sacrificing community. That means someone can be black and be true to a black community AND seamlessly thrive within the larger community. Yes. We believe black people can be uncompromisingly black without being exclusive, in fact, through black culture society can see inclusivity through fresh eyes. Conversely we believe white people (or any race) can be uncompromisingly white without being exclusive.

Culture according to Dope.

Being black is inclusive, not exclusive. There are more things in common than uncommon. In fact, I’d point out the language of black America, the culture of black America, is part of the weave that unites America. Just as words can divide, they can unite. In fact, words, commonly understood, may be one of the greatest bonding ‘tools’ in existence. Dope is a way of speaking, way of thinking and way of Life. Its black culture, captured in cultural language, capturing a multi-colored world in a common narrative.

Coffee according to Dope.

A cup of coffee is a connection to a conversation between people, thoughts & ideas – either self reflectively or in engaging with others. It creates an intersection in which we can linger upon the important things. We have crafted a coffee with this intention in mind – texture, tone, taste – to reflect upon what connects us, not divides us. We see our coffee as, well, dope. Dope in that in its excellence it permits people to reflect upon what good the world offers rather than dwell on the bad.

Black coffee using black culture to create a brighter world view one conversation at a time.

Dope Coffee is an idea which collects ideas. Therein lies the power of being an idea and not just a product. The core idea, always revolving around a product which tends to be an energy source for connecting, is a collection of ideas (whatever makes up the individuals’ conversations & thinking of that moment).

This makes idea selling a little tricky, but expansive in its potential. The larger idea is simple, in and of itself, and coffee is simple in and of itself, yet, the conversation is complex in its variety of depths and dimensions. But that’s how we navigate complex ideas and a complex world – by offering a lily pad of certainty people can settle on (if but for a moment) so that complexity can be faced well.

Ideas, language and products.

Far too often we parse these out or choose that one is more important than another when, instead, we should embrace the ‘weave’ which binds a good brand positioning in the market place. It is most likely when you do weave them all together the ‘package’ will be distributed and used by humans (people).

Just ponder.

Drink a cup of coffee, think about the Dope idea (or any dope idea), and see where it takes you. This type of thinking, about ideas, is expansive in a good way. Its complexity in a good way.

Mea Culpa:

There are a few sentence/phrases in this piece which I pulled from little scribbled notes I made over time. There is a possibility I am using, verbatim, something that someone else crafted. I apologize and would be happy to source if I knew the source. As Rob Estreitinho has pointed out – I am a gentleman thief.

Far too often businesses overemphasize speed. They confuse speed with quality, value and, most importantly, agility. This confusion typically leads one to making the most obvious or most popular or the most expedient <speediest> decision rather than the best decision <the one which creates velocity>.

We should always remember that at its core agility is not speed, but rather making haste patiently or festina lente <make haste slowly or patiently>.

Decision making is all about the combination of recognizing the resources at hand, patience and timely haste. Unfortunately, today’s business world is infamous for the efficiently hasty ‘close’ <most expedient choice> and not the patient hunt <for the right choice>.

———————–

“Strategy is turning the resources you have into the power you need, to win the change you want.”

Marshall Ganz

—————————

This infatuation with speed far too often forces us to make decisions based on limited or ambiguous information. The truth is, when done well, decision making and consequences is actually a patient methodical process where at the beginning of the process, when the finer details have yet to be clarified, there is a need to be bolder in our decision-making – particularly because these early decisions have the most far-reaching consequences. With more resources, and knowledge, and have fewer doubts about what to do, there are less fundamental things to decide. This is called the Consequences Model created by the Danish organization theorists Kristian Kreiner and Søren Christensen.

Philosophically, this means the most important question is how we can bridge the chasm between doubt and decision. This shouldn’t be done just by ‘feel’ or ‘gut’ but rather incorporating in some patient assessment. Here is the paradoxical quandary business is in.

Faster good choices are better, i.e., fast AND good.

The problem is there are very few good “choicers” <people who can do the first thought well> available. Yes. Many within an organization believe they are good ‘choicers’ despite more often implementing less than optima choices <and permitting them to make choices has a paradox effect of building additional personal self-esteem as ‘good choicers’ thereby encouraging poor choice making>.

Organizations, to be more efficient & effective, should drive choices <all> to the select few good ‘choicers’ AND incorporate some selective patience amid its haste.

Look. All I am suggesting is that some people are really good at making ‘hastier choices.’ They have that mental clarity that actually improves in hasty moments and the maturity to slow down the moment and say ‘let’s not be so quick to make haste’ <and actually be right about it>. But not everyone is like this.

And, in fact, they are a minority. I imagine the optimal world would be to funnel all choices through this minority. Imagine being the key word because that is an imaginary world. We couldn’t do it.

** note: organizations also need to cultivate people with ‘good choicer’ characteristics because experience actually improves their effectiveness (effectiveness being breadth of experience as well as #’s of trails & errors).

If your life, or your business, has one or two of these people use them, preserve them, foster them and trust them <you will go farther faster than you ever imagined>.

If you do not have the luxury of having one of them around <which by the way you have to learn to manage speed & patience, i.e., master festina lente>.

Look. I don’t like hasty decisions. And decision making has no formula with regard to hasty patience decision making because errors can result from deciding too quickly or by delaying too long.

Too quickly and … well … a decision can be killed in so many ways your head can spin.

Too slowly <too patient> … well … at least by delaying you can watch everything unfold as you watch the decision’s life slowly unravel in the form of lost opportunities or lost <or reduced> benefit from a quicker decision.

Making decisions is difficult, okay, making good decisions is difficult <because anyone can make a decision>. And it does take some experience to become more adept at making decisions especially in a time constrained situation.

Experience is important, and necessary in my view, because effective hasty patience is all about sifting through all the choices available.

Too fast and you die.

Too slow and you die.

That said. Here is what we do know. No one will get this right all the time, therefore, having a distinct brand with a bold, vivid stance in the marketplace creates bridges. Bridges which can keep you from falling into a crevasse on a bad decision and speed you across a crevasse with a good decision. It guarantees velocity as well as increases the odds of survival to have velocity another day.

Velocity, at its core, is about decision utility, i.e., which decision will create the greatest return. I call itReturn on Choice (ROC). In business you face a relentless onslaught of decisions to be made. Jackson & Jackson (How to Speak Human) suggest its over 30,000 decisions each day. Given the sheer quantity, success is often dictated by how well you choose what is important versus what is not as important versus what is not important at all.

Well. Let’s face it. No matter how good you are you will not always get this right.

Well. Let’s face it. We could all become more adept at making choices because, let’s face it, if anything, we seem to have become worse at making thoughtful choices.

There is a direct relationship between ROC and impatience: too impatient poorer ROC & just enough patience higher ROC.

Now. I am all for, and a huge proponent of not dicking around <the technical term for ‘wasting time overthinking’> when a choice needs to be made. But there is a difference between making speedy decisions and making a decision because speed is the main criteria. The latter encourages impatient decision making which lessens decision utility.

This happens for two reasons:

Impatience exacerbates our typically poor prioritization skills

Impatience emphasizes Personal bias

Prioritization skills

Since we live in a world of infinite possibilities, it’s incredibly hard to figure out what to do, when, and where.

If you start thinking this way, well, you begin living in a world strewn with hypotheticals.

If I do A, then this will happen. But what if I do B? Will it be better? Will I get back more? Will everyone around me be more satisfied? Or what about C? That looks good. Oh. But someone suggested D.

You get it. There are 26 letters in the alphabet and while most of us stop way before Z even getting to D can be maddening. It seems like the world is your oyster … everything is possible … but you don’t take advantage of any opportunities because you’re not sure of what’s best.

This is where I remind everyone what US President Dwight D. Eisenhower supposedly said: ‘The most urgent decisions are rarely the most important ones’.

Misreading the urgent from the non-urgent and the important from the unimportant may create impatience at the wrong time and waste energy & focus. Smart Business patience at its most simplest is grounded in the The Eisenhower Matrix. While Stephen Covey is often credited with the decision making matrix it was actually Dwight Eisenhower, considered a master of time management, who developed the matrix.

Decision utility is often driven by effective prioritization what to do do and what not to do.

It is natural we depend on defaults or ‘decision heuristics.’ They are times savers and actually assist ius in more efficiently navigating the 30,000+ decisions we have to make and getting shit done. But. When impatient we get, well, a little lazier. We lean in on our bias which is unfortunate because thinking takes hard work and every choice has opportunity costs. Unfortunately, most of us are not good at assessing ROC <return on choice> when viewing things thru a bias.

Especially when impatient people need to invest in working to eliminate bias.

Invest in developing the choices <and however many we need to feel like we have enough to assess assuming that is a finite number>.

Invest in actually assessing the choices <better, betterest & best assuming a best can be actually identified>.

Invest in the actual choice.

I imagine we are talking about the proper investment in time because organizational impatience leads to the permitting of poor choices <and a quicker death of a thousand cuts>. Maybe even more important is impatience without good investment equals ‘lost velocity.’ Or maybe even worse? Missed velocity.

Dealing with impatience and balancing impatience & patience ain’t for the faint of heart.

Managing decisions is all about a thorough understanding of the decision’s hierarchy of needs, navigating bias & understanding the attributes in a span of time that generates the most rewarding outcome. Being impatient doesn’t mean you ignore this thinking, but rather you incorporate it into your impatience <and it can dictate how patient you are in your impatience>.

I will suggest successful impatient decision making is about having, well, a rigid policy of flexibility.

Ok. Translation. Effective impatient patience is all about mental clarity – creating mental space to see things, feel things, absorb things and make those things into a decision or choice.

When you are facing a choice, making that decision <yes or no, do it or don’t do it>, you go through a cost-benefit check that may last anywhere from a split second to days, weeks, or even months <and yes even months can be an impatient patient choice>.

Such choices come up many times a day and time is a factor in virtually all of them.

It is a constant stream of choices. And each choice can mean the difference between speed & velocity.

It is easy to see how impatience can be abused if we regard life in today’s world as an almost unbroken fast moving river of choices/decisions of which they only represent different paths versus crossroads.

It is easy to see how with everything moving so fast all the time you can actually feel like you are speeding along even without making any good ROC choices. But 99 times out of a 100 there is little velocity, just movement.

———————–

Note:

Velocity is 2 dimensional in what you leverage from and then the choices you make to create a higher decision utility (ROC: Return on Choice). We believe having a distinct vivid brand, and bold brand message, insures your highest ROC .

Speed is the distance traveled over time. I can run around in circles with a lot of speed and cover several miles that way, but I’m not getting anywhere. Velocity measures displacement. It’s direction-aware.

Farnam Street

—————————–

My obessesion with velocity means i embrace something called “The Velocity Zone.” The velocity zone has a direct relationship to ‘doing shit’ (progress type projects, not speed/stagnant projects) and “shit with distinction’ (distinct brand messaging & positioning, no ‘bla’/boring/meaninglessness). It is this combination which not embraces generating value but also the velocity necessary to consistently elevate value above competition and the sales associated with doing so.

Velocity

The enemy of velocity are the ‘to do’ lists are endless with lots checked-off, but never get shorter and the people who are working long hours but what is done never seems to create any meaningful progress.

This is speed while being stagnant. It’s like a hamster in a wheel. It’s not only unsatisfying for the people in the wheel, but the business itself doesn’t gain any satisfying results (although managers are usually quite creative in result presentations to make it seem like shit is moving everyone forward).

Velocity is always about decisions. What I mean by that is there is never any lacks of things to do in a business but some just aren’t worth doing.

Inherent to any velocity based progress is distinctiveness. All things being equal, being distinct insures multiplicative effect rather than simply an additive element to everything else happening. This doesn’t men you should seek to be bold or vivid in your positioning & messaging & branding just for the sake of doing so. What it means is that you walk as close to the edge of what your brand character/personality is and bring it to life in as vivid a way as possible. This means you are walking as far away from being ‘bla’ (meaningless gray) as possible.

Now.

Oddly a current business trend, collaboration, gets in the way of gaining desired distinction. Why? 2 reasons:

the issue collaboration faces is many people think it equates to committee, consensus & incrementalism. Distinction SHOULD be a collaborative effort because the closer you get to the edge the more important it is that everyone believes the edge is a good place to be. But this is not a committee or consensus decision unless you seek to edge closer to ‘bla.’

—————–“In my experience, committees can criticize, but they cannot create. Search the parks in all your cities You’ll find no statues of committees.”

David Ogilvy

————————-

Choose your distinction wisely. Not all distinction is distinct, but being distinct matters.

The Velocity Zone

The Velocity Zone is easy to identify but, surprisingly, many businesses find it difficult to get to. they constantly select incremental progress projects inching up above stagnancy but never really getting any meaningful progress. They constantly dream of being distinct and, yet, pragmatically justify some minor attribute as being ‘bold’ trading the opportunity for distinct for ‘bla.’

There’s only one thing I can guarantee in business. The relationship between business success and the Velocity Zone. If you get in this zone, and stay in this zone you will progress. I will not guarantee you will succeed, but I can guarantee you will not fail.

“If a man shall begin in certainties, he shall end in doubts; but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties.”

=

Francis Bacon

—-

“I don’t rule out anything.”

——-

We spend a lot of time on ‘fake news’ and how people use Facebook to get their news and a whole bunch of stuff that doesn’t have to do with personal responsibility and accountability for how individuals consume information.

That said.

Yikes.

Yikes is all I can say when thinking about the gap between when an event happens and the inevitable truth comes out. In fact I would suggest that in between is simply the ‘big squeeze’ where you & I <and, unfortunately, truth> gets squeezed.

In today’s news and social media universe … world events, facts, speculation and truth become so blurred it is not only difficult to know what is going on; it is difficult to know what did go on.

The trouble is that facts get dribbled out like scarce drops of water and each get analyzed as if they were each an ocean of facts <when it is one drop of information and a gazillion drops of speculation>. A story unfolds slowly … never fast enough for anyone … and if you don’t pay attention ‘your’ story may be three or four editions behind, yet, that is what you believe>.

So.

What can we believe?

What is “true” or “valid” or “reliable” information?

Oops. These words are all slightly different. And, unfortunately, those differences create entirely different worlds of meaning. In fact those words inevitably intrude between the event and truth. They intrude between reality and perceptions and, ultimately, understanding.

All the while the confusion upsets the majority.

—–

“There is much contradictory news, I really don’t know what to believe.”

—–

Excessive alarm, fueled by misleading news reports, leads to knee-jerk responses that are not necessarily for the best.

It is another fact that theories grow without facts.

And then scraps of information beget even more theories.

And initial theories are revised with new information.

And in the end theories are actually created by selective use of some scraps of information.

I would suggest the main ingredient between event & truth rumor generation and transmission is uncertainty. It is within the lack of full information, some of which is called a ‘mystery’ or ‘crisis’, which permits everyone to play detective and theorist for a day. This uncertainty also creates opportunities for people with existing agendas to dwell on their favorite themes <take a moment and think about this in business, i.e., that ambitious fool in the cubicle across the floor seeking an opportunity to move ahead in the wretched in between of the event and final truth>.

All that said. As events happen and information unfolds I realized that a guy named Alain Badiou has provided some good thoughts about what happens between the event and truth.

——-

“…. truth enters into the world for Badiou not as a state but as a process, or more specifically as four processes: love, politics, art and science.

He claims that truth itself is almost impossible to recognise as truth, but it can become briefly discernable for a passing moment in what he calls an event.

The event is a rupture in the current circumstances caused by an awareness of what is missing from those circumstances. The event is a glimpse of the void inherent to any given state.

Having experienced such an event, a subject is created who has a chance to affect the world by remaining faithful to the event of truth they have encountered.”

Alain Badiou

——

It is maddening, but, he is correct. An event is being defined by:

love <people who are hurt or benefit from>

politics <those with an agenda>

art <I will loosely use this as journalism, but in today’s social world let’s call it ambient journalism or amateur storytelling>

science <the endless array of experts who cite research and science>.

We are barraged from all sides by these four things. I will call this the big squeeze. We get squeezed as truth is validated by the traditional aspects in which truth is arrived at:

—

– Anecdotes: Powerful compelling narrative examples of phenomena from world of experience that might embody a principle. Ideas correspond to real world events.

– Statistics: Could that observation of a phenomenon be in error? Statistics reveals patterns and tests validity of generalizations –For example, if a finding was made by chance.

– Explanatory power: Utility of an idea in helping integrate a larger array of ideas in a coherent way.

—

Uhm. Trouble. Those three things imply ‘time.’ As in a reasonable amount of time to have these things unfold. Its trouble because while media endlessly states with sincerity “of course it is premature to draw conclusions” they immediately veer into theory, hypothesis and speculation and second guessing decisions and actions as well as guessing <or speculating> on conclusions all the while establishing the outer limits of what is only frustrated guesswork, but is truly the outer limits of the boundaries squeezing us.

——

“In this age of instant reporting and tweets and blogs, there’s a temptation to latch on to any bit of information, sometimes to jump to conclusions.

But when a tragedy like this happens, with public safety at risk and the stakes so high, it’s important that we do this right. That’s why we have investigations. That’s why we relentlessly gather the facts. That’s why we have courts. And that’s why we take care not to rush to judgment — not about the motivations of these individuals; certainly not about entire groups of people.”

President Barack Obama

——-

Yes. Most of us want to know when there is an event. But. Yes. We also want to know truth. And, yet, the world around us is squeezing us on all 4 sides with images and words. We get squeezed so hard that the ‘gap’ between the event and truth actually becomes the crisis; not the event itself <and if any word is being overused these days it is certainly ‘crisis’>.

This brings me to Truth. Truth is never <or let’s say … very very rarely> a static state. If it were than an event would have a predetermined truth. Badiou sees knowledge as ultimately fragile and subject to change. I agree. Truth is often contextual and always is dependent upon a collection, and coherence, of essential information.

Look. As an event occurs truth is created. Which means we should look to science as to how we should assess information in the gap … as we are getting squeezed:

—-

VALIDITY of data refers to its accuracy and specificity, as well as its applicability to the question being asked.

As we transfer information we learn about an event into our pea-like brains and start thinking about it … we are right to question and test our perceptions — to establish the validity and reliability of our experiences and the beliefs they engender.

We are all concerned about what is true and what is not — with what is real.

Memory and imagination are strong sources of imagery. But our struggle is to discern our internal instincts <thoughts we naturally gravitate to> from the external opinions mixed with true knowledge or we are hopelessly confused.

Oh. Scientists are awesome at actually discerning. As they explore the boundaries of what is ‘known’ they are especially wary. They are often confronted with information for which there is little or no precedent to guide their judgment about the meaning of their data.

Oh. Politicians and journalists suck at this. Politicians and journalists have a common interest in crises. When there’s a crisis, people buy newspapers and turn on the news to learn how politicians and leaders will fix the crisis. In addition crises give politicians <and people with some agenda … in general> more power.

And maybe that is where the big squeeze, the gap between the event and the truth, really gets us.

We seem to be a society fond of creating a sense of crisis all the time and only some of the time, now and then, the truth comes out.

Many philosophers have expounded on the difference between knowledge and truth, but not many have invested a lot of energy <and thinking> of how a sense of crisis affects how we absorb knowledge and arrive at truth.

Look. Not everything is a crisis. It can be a tragic event, it could be a tragedy of errors, it could simply be an unfortunate confluence of unintended consequences, but most events are not crises.

This is true in every day Life as well as in business.

But regardless of an events ‘label’ I can almost guarantee we will be squeezed by a combination of what I stated earlier — Truth is not a state but a process, or more specifically as four processes: love, politics, art and science.

When an event happens we will be squeezed in the gap between the event and truth by the 4 things I listed above.

How much you care.

How much society cares <politics>.

How much art cares <because they create the words & imagery>.

How much science cares <because they create the facts>.

We just need to try and not be suffocated by all that caring until the truth is aired. Regardless. Events occur and truth emerges. Everybody should ponder that as they setp into the next created Big Squeeze between the event and the truth.

“It was the in-between time, before day leaves and night comes, a time I’ve never been partial to because of the sadness that lingers in the space between going and coming.”

——

Sue Monk Kidd

——

“Ambiguity of language is philosophy’s main source of problems.

That is why it is of the utmost importance to examine attentively the very words we use.”

—

Giuseppe Peano

=============

Fear of being misunderstood. If you type that into google you get about 159,000,000 results in 0.42 seconds and only one, yes, one result is about the version I am talking about. The version today is not being misunderstood as a person, but, literally, not being understood when speaking or communicating something. That said. I did find the term ambiguphobia which is applied to the pathological fear of being misunderstood. It has the same word root as “ambiguous.”

Ambiguity.

If you elect to believe the world is often ambiguous, complex not simple, that cause & effect (98% of the time) is nonexistent, and truth is more often conditional not absolute, you are doomed to have a fear of being misunderstood. This fear may be constant or intermittent or maybe even like a flux capacitor … but it exists in some form or fashion.

I thought about this after listening to a Jason Fox podcast where he kind of flippantly mentioned he had a fear of being misunderstood and read a piece he linked to at Ribbon Farm “The Tragicomic Exasperations of Expertise.”

Here is what I believe.

If you elect to believe the world is complex and simplicity is elusive, you spend a lot of time in the wretched hollow between:

Certainty versus uncertainty

Absolute truths versus contingent truths

Pragmatism versus dreams

Short term versus long term

Safety versus risk

Old beliefs versus new understandings

Fixed versus unfixed

Fluid versus solid

If you reside in the complex universe, you will find your cozy cottage resides in this windswept, stormy grassy hollow. And I would suggest you also spend a lot of time in the kitchen of the cottage mixing ingredients seeking the perfect potion to make the complex understood. I would also suggest this is the wretched hollow – continual experimentation of ingredients.

“<things> get better when exposed to external stressors and change.”

Dr. Jason Fox

That said. If you elect to believe the world is complex, let me suggest two thoughts for you to ponder about this wretched hollow in terms of ‘fear of being misunderstood’:

Wretched hollow version 1: where ideas go to die

If you have decided to reside in the complex universe, suffice it to say you have decided to be in the thinking & ideas business. While your skillset may have some aspects of ‘doing’ and results you have put a stake in the ground that progress is dependent upon people thinking about shit and in that thinking will better navigate a way toward success.

In other words you have inextricably linked thinking to progress. This is important because in this version of the wretched hollow this is where ideas go to die if you are misunderstood.

In other words. You are in the thinking and ideas business (a version of the ‘Progress Business’) and if you are not understood your thinking and ideas die. Uhm. No more business and certainly no progress (or at least your version of it).

This is a pragmatic fear of being misunderstood. The product you want to sell, not being understood, is not bought.

I will note here this is where I believe business people, experience, has an advantage over academics & thought leaders. In business if you cannot make uncertainty certain enough or the invisible esoteric thinking visible enough, you die. You become a superfluous thinker who doesn’t know how to get things done or, in general, no one knows what to do with what you say & think. You are simply mental masturbation.

Wretched hollow version 2: where ‘self’ goes to die

Doubt, Imposter Syndrome, confidence, even arrogance wander in this wretched hollow. Fear of being misunderstood haunts not just your ideas and thinking, but you. This is the world you have elected to be in. Others have chosen detail, you have chosen definitions (link).

By choosing the path of definitions, versus details, psychologically there is a constant tug of war between all of the things I just stated. Your only real contribution to the tug of war is to continuously eat up more & more knowledge in the attempt to put more weight on the positive side of the tug of war. Unfortunately knowledge weighs less, proportionately, than doubt/uncertainty, or even ignorance, so even as you become more smart, wiser, & better at articulating the Sumo wrestler sized doubts (the actual fear of being misunderstood) never lose any weight and keep tugging.

My point here is that electing to reside in the complex universe and making your business the business of thinking & ideas is a non-stop, never-ending tug of war. So. You are in the game or you are not. And if you are worth half a shit you will find that you never lose the tug of war, the other side just tugs a little harder on occasion. But. And this is a big but. The moment you stop pulling the fear of being misunderstood changes to death of the universe you have elected to live in and even the business you have elected to be in. I know that sounds harsh, but ‘self’ has some pretty dark places and if you give up the rope it is really really hard to not only climb back out of the darkness, but also get a new strong grip on the rope in the tug of war. Just ponder because even if you do not agree with me in totality on this point even at a lesser degree it has repercussions to fear of being misunderstood.

Let me end this version of wretched hollow by pointing out that if you have elected to make thinking & ideas your business, and you struggle to make people understand your thinking & ideas, you will inevitably start questioning the value & meaning you provide. Period. Full stop.

“Aiming at brevity, I become obscure.”

Horace

Lastly.

Mixing the formula.

That’s the deal, isn’t it? finding the right amount of certainty, tangible understanding, to freedom (uncertainty) ratio? It’s the proportionate amount of traction points (I call them lily pads of certainty) to provide structure to hold up the uncertain, freedom and adaptability of thinking, in people’s minds (leading to them actually doing something). That’s where the fear of being misunderstood centers itself – will I mix the right formula this time?

This is where Life gets tricky.

All people inherently need some successes or, well, you go into some pretty dark places. So your natural instincts arc toward ‘being understood.’ That means offering up simplicity, maybe some tasty soundbites and, often, some fairly vapid generalizations attempting to tap into some common perceptions. That means you incrementally shave away at complexity which, inherently, shaves away truths and impact/effectiveness. That means while you have elected to reside in the universe of complexity you are selling out the value of that universe (I would argue that diminishes self but that’s not my point today).

I will say (part 1) the people in this space with the most success not only constantly gain knowledge but use it in a ‘play, pause, rewind, fast forward’ way. What I mean by that is the formula cannot be rushed and neither can complexity understanding be completed in a formulaic way. In other words it not only takes an ability to assemble the right fragments but do so with pacing to engage cognitively.

“Be still amidst the chaos and active in repose.”

Indira Ghandi

I will say (part 2) that the tricksters, and ignorant, who casually ease round simplistic pegs into uneven hexagon complex holes exponentially outnumber the experts. And you know what? People, in general, like round pegs. Smooth, simple and easy to grasp. This does not mean people are stupid just that tricksters are masters of the illusion, and delusion, of progress and the doyens of detail. In general, they thrive on detail cloaked in fortune cookie wisdom. It’s simplistic, not simple.

And maybe that is where I should end. The fear of being misunderstood is really about knowing, in your heart of hearts, you have chosen the rockier path as two roads diverge and, well:

I shall be telling this with a sigh

Somewhere ages and ages hence:

Two roads diverged in a wood, and I—

I took the one less traveled by,

And that has made all the difference.

Fear of being misunderstood is all about fear of choices – have I made the right one, or ones, and in doing so have I made myself clear of why the roads are what the roads are and why as they diverge we should walk on this one today.

Fear of being misunderstood is all about making the choice to making the complex understood.

Fear of being misunderstood is all about the choice that progress is actually made through the complex rather than simplicity.

Fear of being misunderstood is all about fear people do not understand the choice you made.

Regardless. There is a positive side.

Progress is not a linear process. Mastering complexity or at least wrangling complexity insures not only progress, but antifragile progress and progress with value. I will never suggest fear is a good thing, but I will say that when you get it right, when you share the thinking and ideas and it is understood, and your fear of being misunderstood is absolved for at least that moment – it is a great feeling. And it’s a great feeling not because you have been understood, but rather because by being understood energy has been created, or traction provided, for progress to occur.

So many nights wanting morning. Our lust for future comfort is the biggest thief of life. “

=

Joshua Glenn Clark

—

So. I almost called this ‘thief of life.’

This began as I sat listening to a business discussion the other day when I realized that I was just hearing one reason after another being vocalized on why something shouldn’t be done. Ah. Please note. I said “shouldn’t” not “couldn’t.” It was a litany borne of either laziness or fear.

Regardless. Here is the scary part <at least to me>. It became a numbers game. Numbers, as in, even if the one reason ‘to do’ was the right thing to do or, at minimum, at least doing something was better than nothing, the logic seemed to come down to this:

‘well, if we have all these <100> reasons to not do it … it seems like a bad idea.’

Stop.

Stop right there.

Doing the right thing is not a numbers game. I can always … let me repeat … ALWAYS find reasons to not do something. I will note that the main reason to not do somethings comes down to “wishing.” What I amen by that is people sit around wishing for something to change that will make the 100 reasons vanish in the blink of an eye and the “one right thing” stands alone in the spotlight of what to do.

—

“The world is not a wish-granting factory.”

Gus <Fault in our Stars>

——————-

But it doesn’t work that way. While I don’t have research on my side <because I am fairly sure no research has ever been done on this> doing the right thing, or the 1 thing which everyone really knows should be done, almost always seems to have to fight a battle of attrition. One in which you can either get pecked to death by ducks, slowly bleed to death through little slices from sharp simple minded ignorant fearful knives, or simply by being bludgeoned over and over again with some blunt dull cumbersome object.

The 1 often seems to need what Lincoln called ‘the full measure of devotion’ to put things into motion for the forces of good

Anyway. The 100 reasons are simply 100 thieves.

They steal life.

They steal honor & integrity.

They steal opportunity.

They steal truth & reason & logic.

They steal it one coin at a time. In the end your pockets are empty.

Look. In most cases and situations doing something embodies infinite potential, and scarily, infinite possibilities or, in pragmatic terms – infinite consequences and unintended consequences. While we don’t like to admit it in this business world of ‘setting objectives to measure against’ is more often a choice, or a decision, which can, and will, have multiple outcomes & consequences.

Yes.

You surely try and herd the choice into the direction and path you desire. That’s kind of what managing a decision is all about. But that is managing movement. Conversely, the ‘100 reasons to not do’ are managing stagnancy. Or ‘non decisions. Both, I may add, have consequences and, whether we like it or not, accountability resides in both decisions and non decisions.

—————

“Every moment has infinite potential.

Every new moment contains for you possibilities that you can’t possibly imagine.

Every day is a blank page that you could fill with the most beautiful drawings. “

John C. Parkin

————

That said. I find this whole ‘let’s come up with 100 reasons so we do not have to do the one thing we should do’ slightly puzzling for several reasons.

Puzzling in that possibilities are exciting and, in general, people like the concept of possibilities. Possibilities represent hope. And, yes, they are scary <because they are … well … possibilities … not guarantees or promises>.

But. I imagine I am puzzled because if I put ‘possibility’ on a scale, I am fairly sure it weighs more than ‘not a promise’ <not all uncertainties are created equal is my point>. And I understand that a sliver of fear carries a disproportionate weight to its size, but I still sense that in most people’s minds possibility is a joyful burden.

Next.

Puzzling in thatsociety has embraced ‘simplicity’ like it is a long lost child. Well. Let me say it has embraced simplicity & efficiency <to the detriment of all other children society may have>. I say that because the 100 reasons takes a lot of work to come up with and they are complex <when the list is complete> and time consuming to think up and list. Its puzzling we invest so much energy in the 100 when the 1 most likely represents the simplest & more efficient.

It gets even more puzzling especially when examining the fact that “1”, which even if debatable, almost always carries a thread of ‘I want to do this’ feeling within everyone. And that implies organizational or ‘crowd’ alignment in some form or fashion and that ultimately begets <or translates into> some variation of efficiency. Its puzzling because on the other hand, the 100, the doubts, vary from individual to individual.

Anyway.

Suffice it to say. In order to do something, to get shit done, you cannot let the 100 beat the 1. Doing something, or making a decision to do something, is not a numbers game. Just because you can come up with a 100 reasons on why to not do something, if the 1 is right, that is enough.

The 1 outweighs the 100.

Maybe that is the issue. In the measurement world we live in this math doesn’t make sense. I mean, c’mon, how could 1 outweigh 100?

Well.

Doing the 1 thing that should be done always makes sense and I venture to say it will carry much greater weight as an impact.

“It is always important to know when something has reached its end. Closing circles, shutting doors, finishing chapters, it doesn’t matter what we call it; what matters is to leave in the past those moments in life that are over.”

―

Paulo Coelho

=========

“No great strategy has ever been proven analytically in advance. Strategy is first and foremost a creative exercise.”

——

Roger Martin

==========================

This is about strategic thinking & communications strategy people. I decided to write this because in interacting with dozens of strategy people I find 3 things:

Common vocabulary. Some of the words may be different but there are some basic lock down words. Conversely. There are also some words which draw a common visceral negative response <brand purpose being one example>.

Common process. Principles are principals. Basics are basics. Some of the blocks, circles & triangles may be configured in slightly different ways but the logic flow is the logic flow.

Common vocabulary. Everyone brings it to Life in their own way.

To me, the strategy commonalities are driven by the fact at the core of any strategy is “then, now, next.” Because of that the core principles of strategic thinking are common and revolve around similar tricks of the trade. That said. Each thinker will have a slightly different emphasis and a slightly different style attached to that emphasis.

Stylistically my sense is it revolves around what someone calls “Next-wise”, in my words, the “what’s next” view. This is usually grounded in trends & the emotional attitudinal aspects which create traction between thinking & behavior (this is often the more intangible ‘magic’ portion). I call it magic because inherent in some strategy is, well, some guessing. No matter how much we rummage around data, learning from the past & people’s minds, sifting thru biases and trends, anything associated with ‘next’ has a little bit of guessing to it. Your guess just gains some likelihood of probability based on how much “certain” type crap you can attach to it.

Given everyone kind of takes the same approach I think the real distinction gap centers around ‘trend rummaging’ because thinking has to tap into the sustained currents of thinking, feeling, and behavior in order to have any relevance. Distinction matters because how you do it and what matters to you, and your thinking, matters because those currents can run fast.

But ‘Trend Spotting’, or at least trend recognition, is integral to any strategy planner. And strategist effectiveness, or ‘expertise & creativity’ is then determined, at least in part, by their trendspotting talent. At its core, effective trend spotting is the ability to spot a pattern between then, now & next. An ability to view what was & what may emerge over time <and what of the things that will emerge will be meaningful & to what extent it will be meaningful>. I would note trend watching expertise really matters because “next” can come in all sizes and shapes and success is not dictated by the sheer size of the ‘Next’ <because niche trend spots can be more valuable that sweeping trend spots>.

The good strategists don’t seek out what will be ‘cool’, but rather the currents of behavior or maybe the evolutions of people, and business, and find the intersections of opportunity.

Now. I debate with many people that these currents don’t run any faster Now than they did Then. That said. I do believe the currents can be a little more fluid & free in its flow and that there are more possible traction points than what have been available in the past.

If you agree with that, then the biggest issue strategists face is balancing fluidity & consistency. Finding the steady place to position itself in what appears to be a chaotic, unsteady, uncertain universe.

I say this because the common words & common process almost insures all the strategy people focus in on a relatively uncertain foundation which all affects attitudes. Uncertain foundation? This varies by age, but the younger tend to seek out some certainty while older bemoan lost certainty. Grant, in The New Marketing Manifesto, highlighted “loss of traditions” as a way of describing this but I would suggest all ages face basic foundational Life elements which are, or no longer feel, as concrete as they may have felt “then.”

Despite all the commonness between some smart strategic thinkers It seems like all the important question answers are yes, no & maybe. That creates challenges because, unfortunately, we are a world of ‘context matters’ where the people in that world inherently seek some certainty not just in answers, but in some aspects of “self” <hence the lucrative life coaching & self-help industries>.

Suffice it to say people are in a crisis of certainty, therefore, a significant part of today’s strategist job is to showcase what is uncomfortably different and make people feel some comfort in What’s Next & what to do Next. I call this skill ‘owning the contradiction’ which is a variation of optimal newness.

Its aligning our ideas & thinking with people, the social fabric/context & the implications for the business itself. Please note. This isn’t directly about a ‘brand’, but rather what makes up a brand. I say that with purpose, not OF purpose. Brands have blurred into life so much so a strategist almost has to ignore the trappings of a brand and focus on the meaningful people attitudes & behaviors, trends weaving their way thru the social fabric, & business aspirations <you do have to sell something in order to sustain a business>. At their best a communications strategist aligns contradictions; the unlikely combinations shaped by the unlikely, the improbable, and the uncertain Next.

Anyway.

In the end.

I love talking about strategy with other strategy people. We sit around talking about then, now & next and this & that. There is a commonality, yet uncommonality, within the conversation. All that said. You learn to not measure your ability by looking at others.

=====================

“Be careful not to measure your holiness by other people’s sins.”

Martin Luther

=================

Smart people are a dime a dozen in the strategy field. You can certainly tell who has “game” and who doesn’t but comparing smarts is a rabbit hole. Instead its just fun to scan the style differences – how each personally decides to bring things to Life. – and that is where strategists separate.

Because while there may be a certainty crisis the best strategists do the same shit, say the same words, and, yet, showcase certainty in different ways and, yet, always seem to thrive in the uncertainty of “what’s next.”

“… businesses want answers right away and many times high statistical reliability is not worth the cost it takes to achieve it.

Insights that point decision-makers to go “left” or “right” is innately good enough. Leaders are oftentimes not willing to pay for “turn left at a 30 degree angle” or “turn right at an 115 degree angle” because it may cost too much money and takes far too long to obtain those precise next steps through drawn-out methodologies.”

—–

Kuhn

==================

“Every great advance in science has issued from a new audacity of imagination.”

=

John Dewey

==============

“Perfect numbers like perfect men are very rare.”

—–

Rene Descartes

============

This is about how ROI gets abused in decision making.

While this is about business what made me think about this is how the Trump administration typically discusses budgets with “we made cuts where there was no evidence of appropriate results” justifications.

Some of those justifications are terrifying.

Some of their choices are terrifying.

Shit. As one writer put it … “the math is terrifying.”

Well. I am going to let other people tear apart the incredibly short sighted Trump budget plans <which, yes, has scraps of good ideas> and I will focus on the criteria it appears they focused on — budget by ROI.

Budgeting by ROI.

Whew. The Trump administration is simply in my cross hairs at the moment, but this topic provides me with another excuse to blast my generation of business leaders and how their misguided thinking has screwed up not only how business is conducted, in general, but how we think about business.

Specifically on ROI, these hollow men hollowed out business of any of the ‘art’ and color which is associated with thriving businesses which contribute to society & cultural norms leaving at an empty husk of dollars & cents and black & white ROI decisions.

————–

ROI.

ROI <return on investment> is a fabulous tool. It offers us every day unimaginative pragmatic schmucks an almost heuristic way to judge some fairly complex and complicated things in business.

But old white men hollowed ROI of anything intangible and along the way scraped away some of the most meaningful things associated with investment in their desire for simplistic “this led to that.” Certainly some investments have linear outcomes and results. But not all. And these hollow men in their black & white pursuit of profit, efficiency and outcomes became color blind. Old white men started looking at people as equal to numbers & dollars and not organic organisms of less than linear productivity <in terms of Life actualization as well as business actualization>. These hollow men fell in love with numbers and began diminishing the value of humanity.

—————-

………. hollow men making hollow decisions ……

Look. I am all for analysis and love quantitatively judging tactics and initiatives. But I also understand that <1> numbers often do not always tell the entire story and <2> we far too often judge ROI on one specific outcome without assessing some value on some ‘ripple effect’ outcomes.

But, first, the numbers and ROI. I once wrote numbers have lost their mojo and, yes, I still believe that … just in a different context. In this case we are dealing with a generation of business people who have completely bastardized the use of numbers – stripping them of anything but the false veneer of what they call “simplistic stark truth.”

Now. ‘Simplistic stark truth’ sounds good … and it sounds really good in the business world. And, yet, in this starkness there is found falseness. The falseness can be found in its lack of imagination, its lack of depth and its lack of seeing anything but ‘what can be measured.’

This stupid view of numbers wreaks havoc when viewing ROI analysis.

Well. I could argue this all happened because ROI analysis permitted a shortcut for business people — a thinking & decision making shortcut. It permitted, and encouraged, an entire generation to not have to really think but rather fallback on “that’s what the analysis said.”

That is plain and simple lazy fucking business <not smart solid business>.

I will not argue that a good ROI analysis can offer a quick spontaneous glimpse of truth viable snapshot, in fact, it was Ralph Waldo Emerson who stated that the growth of intellect is spontaneous.

Of course, he hadn’t been bludgeoned with measurement, ROI and data driven decisions.

Of course, he was also on the one who stated … what is the hardest task in the world? To think. And. We are all wise. The difference between persons is not in wisdom but in art.

And that is where this ‘budgeting by ROI’ is most aggravating.

It is not that they cannot envision the art of decision making but rather they purposefully abstain from the art of decision making <and focus solely on ROI>.

It is not that they are oblivious to the qualitative nature & benefits of budgetary decision but rather they avoid the more difficult defense of the qualitative to utilize the more easy, and lazy, rationale of the quantitative.

All that said. While ROI seems a straightforward way to analyze, ROI, when evaluated properly, can be devilishly tricky. But. When done well it can inform some great insightful decisions and ideas.

ROI, when evaluated properly, can be devilishly painful … like having the devil screaming at you type painful … and even when done well tends to dull <not sharpen> the good ideas.

==============

“The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function.”

F. Scott Fitzgerald

==============

But ROI, measurement … practical rewards & output … that is what we ‘do’ these days. This seem to be our “how we conduct business handbook” these days.

We seem to have forgotten the value of unsought discovery and the value of … well … the benefit of the benefit <I spent money which created ‘x’ outcome … which enabled this other ‘x’ outcome>.

We seem to have culturally decided consciously to … “inevitably we will show a failure of imagination.”

What do I mean ? Let me use a quote from Le Carre’s Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy:

“…in the hands of politicians grand designs achieve nothing but new forms of the old misery…”

In our failure of imagination in our analysis of existing programs and initiatives we come up with grand designs begetting new forms of old misery. Which brings me back to Trump & his administration. These are supposed to be fucking business people and not politicians in place making these ‘grand designs.’

I admit.

I am wary of how ‘we the people’ will move forward with regard to budgeting and programs and policies and deciding what we should do to better America.

I am wary because I see little moving forward, no ‘trying to do what it takes to get there’ other than bludgeoning people with simplistic harsh solutions and no imagination to overcome the cries of ‘why waste money on something like this!”

I am wary because I see men of a generation who bastardized ROI analysis applying their own bastardized version of ROI thinking to people’s lives <under the guise of “applying it to people’s money/taxes” — no, they are not the same>.

I am a business guy.

I cannot envision running a business, or a government, without solid measurement, ROI & budgeting rigor. But I also know from running a business with hundreds of employees that the greatness of an organization does not reside solely in some number or some ROI analysis.

==========

“The true greatness of a nation is not measured by the vastness of its territory, or by the multitude of its people, or by the profusion of its exports and imports; but by the extent to which it has contributed to the life and thought and progress of the world.

===============

I tend to believe most of us every day schmucks recognize that ROI is part of doing business and insuring our hard earned money/taxes is used effectively. But I also believe that most of us every day schmucks also realize that some things just cannot be measured solely by numbers.

I worry that this Trump administration is reflective of the lost art of ROI analysis and the value of discovery

In their love of money as ‘winning’ they have lost sight of the value of seeking what is beyond the horizon. They have devalued imagination to such a point that they most likely define imagination as measurable in an ROI analysis. In other words they take ideas and thoughts, even ones with no history, and embrace them not by saying “what if” and “what could be” but rather by grinding it through some veg-o-matic ROI machine to assess its true value.

And that, my friends, while I am bashing the Trump administration, is actually how far to many businesses build their budgets.

And that, my friends, is not how America does business nor should any business … because it shows a failure of imagination and it is imagination, not ROI analysis, which drives real change and progress.

—————–

“Imagination has brought mankind through the dark ages to its present state of civilization.

Imagination led Columbus to discover America. Imagination led Franklin to discover electricity. Imagination has given us the steam engine, the telephone, the talking-machine, and the automobile, for these things had to be dreamed of before they became realities. So I believe that dreams–daydreams, you know, with your eyes wide open and your brain machinery whizzing–are likely to lead to the betterment of the world.

The imaginative child will become the imaginative man or woman most apt to invent, and therefore to foster, civilization.”

“Your mind is not a cage. It’s a garden. And it requires cultivating.”

=

A Great and Terrible Beauty by Libba Bray

—

“What did thinking ever do for me; to what great place did thinking ever bring me?

I think and think and think.

I’ve thought myself out of happiness one million times, but never once into it.”

=

extremely loud and incredibly close

—

This is a long rambling piece on thinking.

Ok. While often we talk about Time as the new currency in people’s lives, I think we should more often discussing Thinking as the new form of Life currency. Yup. Thinking as a value proposition.

In today’s complex business world it seems like we are increasingly dependent upon thinking work, creativity, and the ability to grasp and apply complex abstract multi-dimensional intellectual challenges. To be clear, thinking work is different from the traditional jobs & work of even the last generation. I am not suggesting past work generations didn’t think, but in an output/creation economy a worker could measure their success in physical quantities – how much stuff was created, sold, shipped or built.

Now. In an idea/thinking economy the measures of success are increasingly intangible <unless you deem profits & stock price as tangible>. In this type of less tangible value proposition all of a sudden ideas or ‘feelings’ create value.

Examples:

==

The iPod was better than other MP3 players not because it had more, but because it had fewer buttons and features – the right buttons and features for music on the go.

—

A restaurant chain displaces a competitor because it feels more (or less) like home.

—

A shoe company thrives because it gives away half the pairs that you buy.Even vacuum cleaners, cars, and backyard grills are made, marketed and sold in ways that were inconceivable in the past.

==

Producing these products and services, consequently, is less a function of the volume of resources that are put in and more a function of “thinking investment” & “creating perceptions <with value>.” In the past more raw materials, better equipment, or people punching a time clock translated directly to more “output.”

Today, value creation is often more about efficiency.

Or minimizing to maximize.

Minimize what to put in and then maximize how creatively you craft the features.

This means that production in today’s business world is about economical/efficient input … and selling is about effectiveness <value creation thru thoughtful ideation>.

That means thinking is the foundation of today’s economy value creation.

Yikes. Yikes because thinking ain’t easy. In fact there is an inherent frailty in the intangible of this thinking foundation.

Frailty? Yup. A couple of frail aspects to this thinking world I am outlining.

There is a mental frailty when it comes to coming up an ‘idea’ <good ideas are tough to come up with and typically very personal> … and there is a positioning in the mind frailty because the value resides more in ‘thought’ than in anything real <kind of nebulous when in thought form> … and then there is a simple ‘space’ frailty in the thinking mind. Good ideas are often quick to arise and quick to die. Ideas , and consequently thinking, is scary.

While I am not particularly fond of the articulation of this creative execution the message is truer than true.

Ideas are scary. This leads me to the last frailty: a frailty in the mind’s capabilities. This frailty is reflected in sheer mind storage space available <or the lack thereof>.

It’s not that there is any decline in mental capabilities but rather the mind becomes overwhelmed with too much thinking. By the way, this is not information overload, that is a different issue, this is simply thinking too much. Too much thinking when the mind would be at its best by … well … not thinking.

Too much thinking can kill inspiration <as all the reasons why it can’t be done arise>.

Too much thinking can kill a thought <as it gets overwhelmed by new thoughts>.

Too much thinking can kill an idea <shifting from good to mediocrity>.

===

“It is a fundamental paradox of human psychology that thinking can be bad for us.”

Ian Leslie

===

By following our own thoughts too closely we can lose our bearings as our inner chatter drowns out common sense and stifles our ‘good thinking’. Most of us are actually really pretty good at naturally stripping away unimportant to what is important when we think. Unfortunately we also suck at stopping after stripping.

What I do know for sure is that in a study of shopping behavior the less information people were given about a brand the better choice they made. Specifically <and this will matter to those marketers who like to give gobs of minutiae to people believing it will help them make a better choice> … when offered full ingredient details the consumer got confused by their options <unable to discern differences and importance> and actually ended up choosing a product they did not like <i.e., people were forcing themselves to select on a criteria that was not really ‘heart preference’ but rather “head <logical> preference.” And they were not happy in the end when they used.

Sometimes the mind gets overwhelmed if it has to think about too much.

This leads me to believing that the art of thinking needs to be nurtured and trained as well as possible to be successful in today’s world. Everyone has a natural thinker within us.

I believe everyone has some innate ability to treat pieces of information as jigsaw puzzle pieces waiting to be put together and create something. But within that innate ability there are some people who seem to slow down rapidly moving pieces mentally so they can see everything and, conversely, there are other people who only see blurs or pieces of the pieces. But everyone, yes everyone, has some ability to sift through the jumbled pot of information and, like a Williams Sonoma colander, trap the essentials and quickly let the inessential run off.

Yes. Thinking has always been about bringing stuff in and letting stuff out.

—

“… we are cups, constantly and quietly

being filled. the trick is knowing how

to tip ourselves over and let the

beautiful stuff out.”

Ray Bradbury

===

Even all that said … today’s world does demand a different type of thinker.

—-

The Thinker

Historically we contemplated in retreat, silence, solitude, and within our own mind. We solved problems in isolation, deep thought, and through introverted reflection.

==

The Contemporary Thinker

In an age of twittering, blogging, social networking, and sophisticated work-place networks, global science networks, and mass-participation and collaboration, information is exchanged in a nonstop connected world.

—–

Today’s thinking and problem solving has to live in a world where we are inter-connected, globally accessible and the exchange of information is fluid. This actually means we have the ability to bring problems closer to solutions and ideas faster to challenge the status quo.

So. Part of the challenge for the next generation of thinkers is how to let stuff out before they simply get overwhelmed with the amount that they bring in. This also means building a stronger ability to immerse in knowledge and then step out of immersion to think.

Uh oh. The stepping in and out is … well … difficult. Even for those who are good at it. In today’s digital/networked society where the world, cultures and people share their experiences via a variety of web based social platforms … information travels, it is fluid, and experiences are shared … meaning that ideas swirl around for thinkers to grab out of the ether <as long as they are paying attention>.

—-

“If you don’t think, then you shouldn’t talk.”

March Hare, Alice in Wonderland

========

“Half the world is composed of people who have something to say and can’t, and the other half who have nothing to say and keep on saying it.”

Robert Frost

———–

Thinking is complex <so trying to tell someone ‘how to think’ seems kind of silly>. But thinking encompasses being creative, thoughtful, and solutions oriented <for thinking without a conclusion isn’t really thinking>. And this thinking is being done in a world where problems are extremely complex, target expectations, markets and industry variables are continuously moving, and our brains often seem like small computers within enormous networks that are constantly reconfiguring.

Well. Let me tell you one last aspect which makes thinking even more difficult <and scary>. Let’s just say most of us every day schmucks, & businesses, are notorious for being future blind.

Why? Well.I am sure there are a variety of reasons, but I would suggest two main reasons:

it is difficult to envision something that doesn’t really exist today, and

we think about insights, the things that inspire true thinking, as the outcome … not the enabler for outcome.

Many years of innovation work have shown me that insights are not enough. In fact, they are fairly worthless on their own. Insights have little intrinsic value without being transformed into frameworks and narratives that can drive strategic action.

–

The best part is when you realize the value is not in the insight itself but what can be done with it. A good insight can inspire unique frameworks, narratives, and actions appropriate for very different challenges and opportunities.

==

I included that insight thought because I sometimes believe that thinking is hard because we love outcomes so much. Often insight is simply the enabler of an eventual outcome <therefore thinking only indirectly has an outcome>. And insights are not all created equal therefore not all outcomes are created equal.

<yikes … there is a nasty Life formula>

Look. All I really know is that today’s world runs on thinking <not making shit> and that thinking is not a particularly valued ‘product’ in today’s world.

We synthesize new ideas constantly.

We tend to learn rapidly.

Yeah. Don’t shake your head and disagree. Most people learn a lot of new stuff really fast.

Uh oh. While we learn, and think, and apply what we just learned … you make mistakes.

Yikes. Mistakes are tough to handle. We know we need to make them but get crucified in real life <and in business> and by society in making them.

This association makes thinking a disease in some people’s minds.

Think too much and bad shit happens.

Think too much and you get terminally ill.

—-

“Thinking has become a disease.”

Eckhart Tolle

—-

“The third-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the majority.

The second-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the minority.

The first-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking.”

A. A. Milne

—————

Well. Thinking can be a disease to some … and improve health in others. Suffice it to say the mind is an amazing instrument when used correctly and a very destructive weapon when used incorrectly. While the mind thrives when dealing with problems it also loves true thinking — thinking driven by you <not a problem>.

This type of thinking is difficult and, frankly, most people don’t like doing it.